Local357 EXCO response to the RPC(FAPA!!)
06-10-2011, 07:37 AM
#61
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 63
[QUOTE=yetanother;1006199]I agree that you have good benefits as part of your dues, but I would assume each frontier pilot also pays more in dues. Also, isn't a vote for RPC simply a vote to allow original frontier guys to remain a separate group (getting to keep FAPA and the associated benefits), while original RAH pilots are stuck finding their own representation (or keeping ibt anyways)? I dont think you can honestly say that a vote for RPC is going to extend your benefits to the other pilot groups.... It just allows you to keep yours.
Just be honest. You'd like to remain completely separate from your RAH peers and RPC is your only hope. There is no true benefit to RAH employees in voting RPC. You have no give and take. Just you keep yours, and leave RAH pilots to continue the status quo (same representation and same whipsaw with frontier). [QUOTE]
Our dues have changed over the years. We had 1.65%, then 1.5 for a number of years. We are currently at 1.65%. Every year we publish a budget and that budget is approved by the membership.
RPC is NOT at all about "remaining completely separate".
Grievance, himms, pro standards, system board, negotiating, Jumpseat, and R&I would all merge and the benefits to the membership would be demonstrable immediately.
This is where I was going with my post that Capt. Sneddon addressed.
Obviously, if the RPC prevails, a number of FAPA reps will remain active. The same can be said of the current 357 Exco.
Each set of Bylaws will remain in effect, and the council will work on a new set for the RPC.
The Local 357 was functioning for quite some time without their own set of by-laws. Why was that acceptable for the IBT and not for the RPC.
I have been very active with the creation and administration of some of the current benefits in place for FAPA pilots (LTD, STD, VFS, etc.)
We can get the entire pilot group on the STD and LTD plan with little effort and minimal costs especially considering the fact that we would be increasing the group size while lowering the average age slightly.
VFS is rather expensive ($1000 per quarter for 700 pilots). However I believe it is completely worth it if it helps just one pilot each year.
None of these benefits were touched during the recent discussions with the company. Nothing has been ratified yet, but the "concession" includes the deferral of two snap backs, a temporary reduction in 401k match, two small accrual reductions and a longevity freeze for most pilots for one year. That is the extent of the give. No work rules were touched, no pay rates were reduced. Previously furloughed pilots will jump from year 2 longevity up to year 4 longevity, an approximate raise in pay of $13 per hour ($60 - $73).
RPC is not FAPA
RPC is FAPA AND the IBT.
It is similar to other programs in aviation that do not function without 100% participation form all involved groups (ASAP comes to mind).
The IBT alone will not work. FAPA alone will not work.
The IBT AND FAPA, working together with a council, will work the best considering all of the options available.
Just be honest. You'd like to remain completely separate from your RAH peers and RPC is your only hope. There is no true benefit to RAH employees in voting RPC. You have no give and take. Just you keep yours, and leave RAH pilots to continue the status quo (same representation and same whipsaw with frontier). [QUOTE]
Our dues have changed over the years. We had 1.65%, then 1.5 for a number of years. We are currently at 1.65%. Every year we publish a budget and that budget is approved by the membership.
RPC is NOT at all about "remaining completely separate".
Grievance, himms, pro standards, system board, negotiating, Jumpseat, and R&I would all merge and the benefits to the membership would be demonstrable immediately.
This is where I was going with my post that Capt. Sneddon addressed.
Obviously, if the RPC prevails, a number of FAPA reps will remain active. The same can be said of the current 357 Exco.
Each set of Bylaws will remain in effect, and the council will work on a new set for the RPC.
The Local 357 was functioning for quite some time without their own set of by-laws. Why was that acceptable for the IBT and not for the RPC.
I have been very active with the creation and administration of some of the current benefits in place for FAPA pilots (LTD, STD, VFS, etc.)
We can get the entire pilot group on the STD and LTD plan with little effort and minimal costs especially considering the fact that we would be increasing the group size while lowering the average age slightly.
VFS is rather expensive ($1000 per quarter for 700 pilots). However I believe it is completely worth it if it helps just one pilot each year.
None of these benefits were touched during the recent discussions with the company. Nothing has been ratified yet, but the "concession" includes the deferral of two snap backs, a temporary reduction in 401k match, two small accrual reductions and a longevity freeze for most pilots for one year. That is the extent of the give. No work rules were touched, no pay rates were reduced. Previously furloughed pilots will jump from year 2 longevity up to year 4 longevity, an approximate raise in pay of $13 per hour ($60 - $73).
RPC is not FAPA
RPC is FAPA AND the IBT.
It is similar to other programs in aviation that do not function without 100% participation form all involved groups (ASAP comes to mind).
The IBT alone will not work. FAPA alone will not work.
The IBT AND FAPA, working together with a council, will work the best considering all of the options available.
06-10-2011, 07:45 AM
#62
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 63
ATC asked about an audit.
The FAPA C&B's require an annual audit.
A third party CPA firm visits the FAPA office for one week every February and completes an extensive audit of all FAPA accounts.
The final annual report, and all previous annual reports, are available for membership review.
The FAPA C&B's require an annual audit.
A third party CPA firm visits the FAPA office for one week every February and completes an extensive audit of all FAPA accounts.
The final annual report, and all previous annual reports, are available for membership review.
06-10-2011, 08:34 AM
#63
New Hire
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: 170/Left Seat
Posts: 9
Faultpush,
I was never asked to come speak to FAPA. In fact, it was insisted upon by Dom. Vice Chairman Trevor Jenkins that only Chairman Pat Gannon and one other ExCo member be allowed to address the FAPA membership. I have seen the email chain, in which that was insisted.
Capt. Gannon attempted to bring Capt Bourne as well as our Local Trustee Doug Turner, but was denied this opportunity by FAPA. It is clear that FAPA wanted to be able to control the conversation from the outset and did not want its membership to hear everything about Local 357, and the IBT.
I can imagine why I was not asked to speak, as your Secretary/Treasurer and I had a long conversation of why I would not support RPC. This is summed up in my post titled: 'History repeating itself with RPC".
I have also not received any retorts or debate about the factual points made about RPC being a front for FAPA as evidence is presented earlier by me, or any debate about the facts brought up in my thread listed above.
So, as I am willing to post everything under my own name without hiding behind a moniker, I am willing to talk about the facts surrounding this process to anyone. I was not asked to speak, so NO I did not choose not too. And by the way, I am not on the ExCo. I am an appointed Chairman of my Committees.
Respectfully,
Dan Sneddon
Capt. Republic Airlines
I was never asked to come speak to FAPA. In fact, it was insisted upon by Dom. Vice Chairman Trevor Jenkins that only Chairman Pat Gannon and one other ExCo member be allowed to address the FAPA membership. I have seen the email chain, in which that was insisted.
Capt. Gannon attempted to bring Capt Bourne as well as our Local Trustee Doug Turner, but was denied this opportunity by FAPA. It is clear that FAPA wanted to be able to control the conversation from the outset and did not want its membership to hear everything about Local 357, and the IBT.
I can imagine why I was not asked to speak, as your Secretary/Treasurer and I had a long conversation of why I would not support RPC. This is summed up in my post titled: 'History repeating itself with RPC".
I have also not received any retorts or debate about the factual points made about RPC being a front for FAPA as evidence is presented earlier by me, or any debate about the facts brought up in my thread listed above.
So, as I am willing to post everything under my own name without hiding behind a moniker, I am willing to talk about the facts surrounding this process to anyone. I was not asked to speak, so NO I did not choose not too. And by the way, I am not on the ExCo. I am an appointed Chairman of my Committees.
Respectfully,
Dan Sneddon
Capt. Republic Airlines
06-10-2011, 08:55 AM
#64
New Hire
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Position: 170/Left Seat
Posts: 9
RPC,
Under Federal Labor Law and the RLA, the Duty of Fair Representation falls to the Elected Representative to a group of Unionized Employees.
Has the NMB accredited or recognized the RPC as a bargaining Agent? No.
Therefore, until the "Council" is formed, who then has Representational authority over the Republic Pilots should RPC win? What is the time frame for RPC by-laws when one group is un-represented, because by federal law, the IBT would no longer be recognized for the Republic Pilots.
So, following this line of questions, if the IBT no longer represents the Republic Pilots, and no "council" has been formed, who has the burden of Duty of Fair Representation? Is it FAPA? If you say no, it is not FAPA, then these Republic Pilots could be unrepresented for an extended period of time. If you say it is FAPA, then there is no legal document that provides that a "council" must be formed, as FAPA has its own by-laws.
The legal research is obviously limited then by which RPC has authority to act as a bargaining agent, by which power it has to form a council, and by what authority it will control over the "two separate bargaining" units. All of these statements can be summed up, by "we don't know."
Therefore, legally speaking RPC is a front for FAPA, by which there are no by-laws creating the "Council" to which it will answer, or this is purely a method to de-unionize the Republic Pilots.
Either of those, is bad news for Republic Pilots. You can claim otherwise, but show me the legal authority or change in FAPA by-laws to show it. FAPA will refuse to make itself sbu-servient to a "Council", while requiring the Republic pilots to do just that.
Once again, I ask for logic, not emotion. Show me the documentation, the by-laws, and the recognition by the NMB to allow this to happen. By the way, the Gate Gormet/IBT which has been touted as the example to follow for RPC, was separately ratified and then recognized by the NMB prior to the election.
Respectfully,
Dan Sneddon
Capt. Republic Airlines
Under Federal Labor Law and the RLA, the Duty of Fair Representation falls to the Elected Representative to a group of Unionized Employees.
Has the NMB accredited or recognized the RPC as a bargaining Agent? No.
Therefore, until the "Council" is formed, who then has Representational authority over the Republic Pilots should RPC win? What is the time frame for RPC by-laws when one group is un-represented, because by federal law, the IBT would no longer be recognized for the Republic Pilots.
So, following this line of questions, if the IBT no longer represents the Republic Pilots, and no "council" has been formed, who has the burden of Duty of Fair Representation? Is it FAPA? If you say no, it is not FAPA, then these Republic Pilots could be unrepresented for an extended period of time. If you say it is FAPA, then there is no legal document that provides that a "council" must be formed, as FAPA has its own by-laws.
The legal research is obviously limited then by which RPC has authority to act as a bargaining agent, by which power it has to form a council, and by what authority it will control over the "two separate bargaining" units. All of these statements can be summed up, by "we don't know."
Therefore, legally speaking RPC is a front for FAPA, by which there are no by-laws creating the "Council" to which it will answer, or this is purely a method to de-unionize the Republic Pilots.
Either of those, is bad news for Republic Pilots. You can claim otherwise, but show me the legal authority or change in FAPA by-laws to show it. FAPA will refuse to make itself sbu-servient to a "Council", while requiring the Republic pilots to do just that.
Once again, I ask for logic, not emotion. Show me the documentation, the by-laws, and the recognition by the NMB to allow this to happen. By the way, the Gate Gormet/IBT which has been touted as the example to follow for RPC, was separately ratified and then recognized by the NMB prior to the election.
Respectfully,
Dan Sneddon
Capt. Republic Airlines
06-10-2011, 10:15 AM
#65
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 63
Dan, the most common example of the council structure is Gate Gourmet. The IBT/HERE council submitted their request for recognition to the NMB on may 18, 2000 and were recognized by the NMB on October 11,2000.
It took the IBT/HERE council 145 days to be determined by the NMB as the bargaining rep for the GG employees.
Meanwhile, the employer at GG recognized a Master Working Agreement in June of the same year. The employees were working under a MWA for three months before the NMB recognized the council as the bargaining rep. The world did not come to an end at GG. The 357 EXCO Chair told me that the GG Council "has been a disaster". The employees have had every opportunity to run another card drive and certify a new union. They have instead chosen to keep their Council. Not only are the IBT/HERE employees happy with their council, they ratified their second MWA in 1996 and their third MWA in 2010.
During each contract negotiation, there were IBT members and HERE members at the table.
Three contracts in ten years. Sounds like a success story to me.
Finally, the craft and class of workers at GG operate under the RLA, just like we do.
Obviously, NO ONE is recommending that the RAH pilot group de-unionize. The fact that you even attempt to spread this rumor is another example of the IBT's pathological fear mongering. We are participating in an NMB representation election. The ONLY way we can possibly de-unionize at RAH is if a majority of the votes cast are for "no representation".
All of this has been done before. We are not plowing new ground under the RLA or with the NMB.
This is just new to us at RAH.
The Council is NOT a stand alone entity. It is a group effort that includes reps from the entire membership.
I look forward to working with you Dan, and quite frankly I expect more from you than what you posted above.
It took the IBT/HERE council 145 days to be determined by the NMB as the bargaining rep for the GG employees.
Meanwhile, the employer at GG recognized a Master Working Agreement in June of the same year. The employees were working under a MWA for three months before the NMB recognized the council as the bargaining rep. The world did not come to an end at GG. The 357 EXCO Chair told me that the GG Council "has been a disaster". The employees have had every opportunity to run another card drive and certify a new union. They have instead chosen to keep their Council. Not only are the IBT/HERE employees happy with their council, they ratified their second MWA in 1996 and their third MWA in 2010.
During each contract negotiation, there were IBT members and HERE members at the table.
Three contracts in ten years. Sounds like a success story to me.
Finally, the craft and class of workers at GG operate under the RLA, just like we do.
Obviously, NO ONE is recommending that the RAH pilot group de-unionize. The fact that you even attempt to spread this rumor is another example of the IBT's pathological fear mongering. We are participating in an NMB representation election. The ONLY way we can possibly de-unionize at RAH is if a majority of the votes cast are for "no representation".
All of this has been done before. We are not plowing new ground under the RLA or with the NMB.
This is just new to us at RAH.
The Council is NOT a stand alone entity. It is a group effort that includes reps from the entire membership.
I look forward to working with you Dan, and quite frankly I expect more from you than what you posted above.
06-10-2011, 11:49 AM
#66
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 227
[QUOTE=RPC Unity;1006259][QUOTE=yetanother;1006199]I agree that you have good benefits as part of your dues, but I would assume each frontier pilot also pays more in dues. Also, isn't a vote for RPC simply a vote to allow original frontier guys to remain a separate group (getting to keep FAPA and the associated benefits), while original RAH pilots are stuck finding their own representation (or keeping ibt anyways)? I dont think you can honestly say that a vote for RPC is going to extend your benefits to the other pilot groups.... It just allows you to keep yours.
Just be honest. You'd like to remain completely separate from your RAH peers and RPC is your only hope. There is no true benefit to RAH employees in voting RPC. You have no give and take. Just you keep yours, and leave RAH pilots to continue the status quo (same representation and same whipsaw with frontier).
Our dues have changed over the years. We had 1.65%, then 1.5 for a number of years. We are currently at 1.65%. Every year we publish a budget and that budget is approved by the membership.
RPC is NOT at all about "remaining completely separate".
Grievance, himms, pro standards, system board, negotiating, Jumpseat, and R&I would all merge and the benefits to the membership would be demonstrable immediately.
This is where I was going with my post that Capt. Sneddon addressed.
Obviously, if the RPC prevails, a number of FAPA reps will remain active. The same can be said of the current 357 Exco.
Each set of Bylaws will remain in effect, and the council will work on a new set for the RPC.
The Local 357 was functioning for quite some time without their own set of by-laws. Why was that acceptable for the IBT and not for the RPC.
There was the pretty obvious notion that "boilerplate" by-laws would be used and that was acceptable. Those were pretty much the bylaws accepted. the RPC has no by-laws and they have to be created which, I'll bet, FAPA would drag out as a "sour grapes" move over the SLI award.
I have been very active with the creation and administration of some of the current benefits in place for FAPA pilots (LTD, STD, VFS, etc.)
We can get the entire pilot group on the STD and LTD plan with little effort and minimal costs especially considering the fact that we would be increasing the group size while lowering the average age slightly.
How can this be done "with little effort and minimal costs" when it is a FAPA contract item? Each group will operate under their own CBA right? RPC has no by-laws. How can you even hint at this benefit?
VFS is rather expensive ($1000 per quarter for 700 pilots). However I believe it is completely worth it if it helps just one pilot each year.
See questions above.
None of these benefits were touched during the recent discussions with the company. Nothing has been ratified yet, but the "concession" includes the deferral of two snap backs, a temporary reduction in 401k match, two small accrual reductions and a longevity freeze for most pilots for one year. That is the extent of the give. No work rules were touched, no pay rates were reduced. Previously furloughed pilots will jump from year 2 longevity up to year 4 longevity, an approximate raise in pay of $13 per hour ($60 - $73).
So you want legacy RAH guys to vote in a union who is offering concessions? Are you crazy? Don't you know what life has been like at RAH since BB got here..? The threats? The gloom and doom? Holy smokes!!
RPC is not FAPA
We find that hard to believe!
RPC is FAPA AND the IBT.
But separate (cough, cough)!
It is similar to other programs in aviation that do not function without 100% participation form all involved groups (ASAP comes to mind).
But those aren't unions...
The IBT alone will not work. FAPA alone will not work.
The IBT AND FAPA, working together with a council, will work the best considering all of the options available.
So we need to vote in RPC and get on the concession bangwagon??? Joooooy..... pfffft!
Just be honest. You'd like to remain completely separate from your RAH peers and RPC is your only hope. There is no true benefit to RAH employees in voting RPC. You have no give and take. Just you keep yours, and leave RAH pilots to continue the status quo (same representation and same whipsaw with frontier).
Our dues have changed over the years. We had 1.65%, then 1.5 for a number of years. We are currently at 1.65%. Every year we publish a budget and that budget is approved by the membership.
RPC is NOT at all about "remaining completely separate".
Grievance, himms, pro standards, system board, negotiating, Jumpseat, and R&I would all merge and the benefits to the membership would be demonstrable immediately.
This is where I was going with my post that Capt. Sneddon addressed.
Obviously, if the RPC prevails, a number of FAPA reps will remain active. The same can be said of the current 357 Exco.
Each set of Bylaws will remain in effect, and the council will work on a new set for the RPC.
The Local 357 was functioning for quite some time without their own set of by-laws. Why was that acceptable for the IBT and not for the RPC.
There was the pretty obvious notion that "boilerplate" by-laws would be used and that was acceptable. Those were pretty much the bylaws accepted. the RPC has no by-laws and they have to be created which, I'll bet, FAPA would drag out as a "sour grapes" move over the SLI award.
I have been very active with the creation and administration of some of the current benefits in place for FAPA pilots (LTD, STD, VFS, etc.)
We can get the entire pilot group on the STD and LTD plan with little effort and minimal costs especially considering the fact that we would be increasing the group size while lowering the average age slightly.
How can this be done "with little effort and minimal costs" when it is a FAPA contract item? Each group will operate under their own CBA right? RPC has no by-laws. How can you even hint at this benefit?
VFS is rather expensive ($1000 per quarter for 700 pilots). However I believe it is completely worth it if it helps just one pilot each year.
See questions above.
None of these benefits were touched during the recent discussions with the company. Nothing has been ratified yet, but the "concession" includes the deferral of two snap backs, a temporary reduction in 401k match, two small accrual reductions and a longevity freeze for most pilots for one year. That is the extent of the give. No work rules were touched, no pay rates were reduced. Previously furloughed pilots will jump from year 2 longevity up to year 4 longevity, an approximate raise in pay of $13 per hour ($60 - $73).
So you want legacy RAH guys to vote in a union who is offering concessions? Are you crazy? Don't you know what life has been like at RAH since BB got here..? The threats? The gloom and doom? Holy smokes!!
RPC is not FAPA
We find that hard to believe!
RPC is FAPA AND the IBT.
But separate (cough, cough)!
It is similar to other programs in aviation that do not function without 100% participation form all involved groups (ASAP comes to mind).
But those aren't unions...
The IBT alone will not work. FAPA alone will not work.
The IBT AND FAPA, working together with a council, will work the best considering all of the options available.
06-10-2011, 01:22 PM
#67
Line Holder
Joined APC: May 2011
Posts: 63
On one page an RAH pilot argues we are going to have one list and one contract tomorrow.
On the next page I offer some constructive ways we can work together and you say we can't accomplish those goals because we will have separate CBAs for a while.
You guys are using whatever argument available to suit your need at the time.
I am not trying to convince 80% of the IBT members that refuse to open their eyes to what else is available to them.
I am trying to show the 20% of IBT members that are open to moving on to the next level of union representation.
If you don't have an open mind, that is fine. Keep doing what you are doing.
Keep throwing good money away.
Keep working with a 1.4 million member union that is clueless about RLA negotiations and represents only 6000 pilots.
James Hoffa robo called me yesterday. Did he talk about pay and work rules? No. Did he talk about retirement plans and insurance? No
He talked about going on strike.
That is the IBT way. All or nothing. Refuse to negotiate and get whatever you can while on strike. Works great for truckers with contracts that expire. It doesn't work at all for pilots that work under the RLA and have contracts that become amendable.
If you are voting for the IBT, holding out hope for jet blue wages and counting on a strike to answer all of your dreams, you deserve the IBT and the IBT deserves your hard earned dues dollars.
Open your eyes folks.
On the next page I offer some constructive ways we can work together and you say we can't accomplish those goals because we will have separate CBAs for a while.
You guys are using whatever argument available to suit your need at the time.
I am not trying to convince 80% of the IBT members that refuse to open their eyes to what else is available to them.
I am trying to show the 20% of IBT members that are open to moving on to the next level of union representation.
If you don't have an open mind, that is fine. Keep doing what you are doing.
Keep throwing good money away.
Keep working with a 1.4 million member union that is clueless about RLA negotiations and represents only 6000 pilots.
James Hoffa robo called me yesterday. Did he talk about pay and work rules? No. Did he talk about retirement plans and insurance? No
He talked about going on strike.
That is the IBT way. All or nothing. Refuse to negotiate and get whatever you can while on strike. Works great for truckers with contracts that expire. It doesn't work at all for pilots that work under the RLA and have contracts that become amendable.
If you are voting for the IBT, holding out hope for jet blue wages and counting on a strike to answer all of your dreams, you deserve the IBT and the IBT deserves your hard earned dues dollars.
Open your eyes folks.
06-10-2011, 01:47 PM
#69
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 227
Originally Posted by RPC Unity
On one page an RAH pilot argues we are going to have one list and one contract tomorrow.
On the next page I offer some constructive ways we can work together and you say we can't accomplish those goals because we will have separate CBAs for a while.
You guys are using whatever argument available to suit your need at the time.
I am not trying to convince 80% of the IBT members that refuse to open their eyes to what else is available to them.
I am trying to show the 20% of IBT members that are open to moving on to the next level of union representation.
If you don't have an open mind, that is fine. Keep doing what you are doing.
Keep throwing good money away.
Keep working with a 1.4 million member union that is clueless about RLA negotiations and represents only 6000 pilots.
James Hoffa robo called me yesterday. Did he talk about pay and work rules? No. Did he talk about retirement plans and insurance? No
He talked about going on strike.
That is the IBT way. All or nothing. Refuse to negotiate and get whatever you can while on strike. Works great for truckers with contracts that expire. It doesn't work at all for pilots that work under the RLA and have contracts that become amendable.
If you are voting for the IBT, holding out hope for jet blue wages and counting on a strike to answer all of your dreams, you deserve the IBT and the IBT deserves your hard earned dues dollars.
Open your eyes folks.
On the next page I offer some constructive ways we can work together and you say we can't accomplish those goals because we will have separate CBAs for a while.
You guys are using whatever argument available to suit your need at the time.
I am not trying to convince 80% of the IBT members that refuse to open their eyes to what else is available to them.
I am trying to show the 20% of IBT members that are open to moving on to the next level of union representation.
If you don't have an open mind, that is fine. Keep doing what you are doing.
Keep throwing good money away.
Keep working with a 1.4 million member union that is clueless about RLA negotiations and represents only 6000 pilots.
James Hoffa robo called me yesterday. Did he talk about pay and work rules? No. Did he talk about retirement plans and insurance? No
He talked about going on strike.
That is the IBT way. All or nothing. Refuse to negotiate and get whatever you can while on strike. Works great for truckers with contracts that expire. It doesn't work at all for pilots that work under the RLA and have contracts that become amendable.
If you are voting for the IBT, holding out hope for jet blue wages and counting on a strike to answer all of your dreams, you deserve the IBT and the IBT deserves your hard earned dues dollars.
Open your eyes folks.
KY in a 10# can is:
Originally Posted by RPC Unity
moving on to the next level of union representation.
06-10-2011, 02:47 PM
#70
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 206
Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
Maybe I'm missing something but what's wrong with someone saying they plan on moving up to bigger equipment in the future? And how does that statement have anything to do with what Dan wrote above?
I don't recall if it was a 747 or 777 though and I'm not going to dig through the transcripts.
I don't care who you are - that's funny.
Last edited by F9 A319; 06-10-2011 at 02:49 PM. Reason: Format
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Rotorhead
Major
16
06-19-2008 05:27 AM
